CVE-2024-36508
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability [CWE-22] in Fortinet FortiManager version 7.4.0 through 7.4.2 and before 7.2.5 and Fortinet FortiAnalyzer version 7.4.0 through 7.4.2 and before 7.2.5 CLI allows an authenticated admin user with diagnose privileges to delete files on the system.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceA path traversal vulnerability (CWE-22) in FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer CLI allows an authenticated admin user with diagnose privileges to delete arbitrary files on the system by using directory traversal sequences in the file path.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 6.4.0, < 7.2.6>= 7.4.0, < 7.4.3>= 6.4.0, < 7.2.6>= 7.4.0, < 7.4.3CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the product and modelRun 'get system status' in FortiManager/FortiAnalyzer CLI to confirm the product name and model numberAffected if Product is FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer
-
Check the installed firmware versionRun 'get system status' in CLI and locate the 'Version' field. Compare against affected ranges: 6.4.0 to 7.2.5, or 7.4.0 to 7.4.2Affected if Version falls within 6.4.0 <= version < 7.2.6 OR 7.4.0 <= version < 7.4.3
-
Verify admin user has diagnose privilegesRun 'get admin user' in CLI and check the 'privilege' or 'ppm' field for the relevant admin account, or run 'diagnose autoupgrade versions' to test diagnose accessAffected if Admin account has diagnose or privileged access enabled
User is affected if running FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer with version 6.4.0-7.2.5 or 7.4.0-7.4.2 and an admin account has diagnose privileges.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped7.2.67.4.3
Upgrade FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer to version 7.4.3 or later, or version 7.2.5 or later, to patch the path traversal vulnerability in the CLI.
FortiManager/FortiAnalyzer 7.2.6 or later; 7.4.3 or later
- Identify current FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer version via web UI or CLI: `get system status`
- Determine appropriate upgrade path based on current version (7.2.x branch or 7.4.x branch)
- Back up current configuration using web UI or CLI: `execute backup config`
- Schedule maintenance window for upgrade
- Upgrade to FortiManager/FortiAnalyzer version 7.2.6 or higher, or 7.4.3 or higher
- After upgrade, verify version: `get system status`
- Confirm the vulnerability is resolved by ensuring diagnose privilege no longer allows arbitrary file deletion
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-36508 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-36508 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data